[WEB SECURITY] Closing web sites due to legislation
pavol.luptak at nethemba.com
Sat Jun 16 15:37:47 EDT 2012
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:50:23PM +0300, MustLive wrote:
> I agree with all your argumentation, Pavol (those aspects which you
> referred to security, similarly can be referred to privacy). Just
> will add the note concerning forcing people.
> From one side, forcing is not very acceptable way, but from other side it's
> needed to remind people - to change current nihilistic situation. And in my
> opinion for security it must be more active, then for privacy. So forcing
> people, in non-aggressive and peaceful way, i.e. by reminding (like
> reminding about holes at websites or in webapps, as I'm doing for more then
> 7 years) can and should be done. And much more for security, then privacy
> (and this EU law concerns only privacy, so "as always they forgot about
Yes, but you are doing it on your own using your own time and money.
EU legislators will do it using tax payers money. That's a big difference.
> Interesting rhetorical question: does any country in EU can to not implement
> this law, because of "not well-thought law", "people are protesting" or
> "there are no money for implementation" (aka "financial crisis"). I
> understand that it's obligatory for every member of EU (I've wrote it
> rhetorically), but anyway some prudence can be made, like it was done in UK.
> So I wish for every country in EU to implement this law harmlessly. And
> there are a lot of other interesting laws, about which I'll write soon.
Yes, that's because the EU is not about people's opinions and their needs,
but about high-level politicians and their interests.
(OK, in the recent year I became a really big euro-skeptic).
[Pavol Luptak, Nethemba s.r.o.] [http://www.nethemba.com] [tel: +421905400542]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 4792 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the websecurity